Abstract

Established environmental policy theory is based on the assumption of homo economicus. This means that people are seen as fully rational and acting in a self-regarding manner. In line with this, economics emphasizes efficient policy solutions and the associated advantages of price incentives. Behavioral economics offers alternative, more realistic views on individual behavior. In this paper we investigate opportunities to integrate bounded rationality and other-regarding preferences into environmental policy theory to arrive at recommendations for more effective policies. For this purpose, we will address decisions made under risk and uncertainty, intertemporal choice, decision heuristics, other-regarding preferences, heterogeneity, evolutionary selection of behaviors, and the role of happiness. Three aspects of environmental policy are considered in detail, namely sustainable consumption, environmental valuation and policy design. We pay special attention to the role of non-pecuniary, informative instruments and illustrate the implications for climate policy.

Biel A, Thøgersen J (2007) Activation of social norms in social dilemmas: a review of the evidence and rejection on the implications for environmental behaviour. J Econ Psychol 28: 93–112CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Cardenas JC, Ostrom E (2004) What do people bring into the game? Experiments in the field about cooperation in the commons. Agric Syst 82/3: 307–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Carpenter J, Myers C (2007) Why volunteer? Evidence on the role of altruism, reputation, and incentives, Middlebury College Working Paper Series 0712, Middlebury College, Department of EconomicsGoogle Scholar

Gächter S (2006) Conditional cooperation: behavioral regularities from the lab and the field and their policy implications. Discussion Papers 2006-03, The Centre for Decision Research and Experimental Economics, School of Economics, University of NottinghamGoogle Scholar

Jackson T (2000) Why is ecological economics not an evolutionary science? 3rd Biennial Conference of the European Society of Ecological Economics (ESEE), Vienna University of Economics and Business AdministrationGoogle Scholar

Norton B, Costanza R, Bishop RC (1998) The evolution of preferences: why ‘sovereign’ preferences may not lead to sustainable policies and what to do about it. Ecol Econ 24: 193–211CrossRefGoogle Scholar